V. I. Lenin

Speech To The Third Workers’ Co-Operative

      Congress[1]

December 9, 1918

Brief Newspaper Report

Delivered:8 December, 1918First Published:Published in full in 1919 in the pamphletSpeeches by Lenin, Milgutin and Nogin at the Third Workers’ Co-operative Congress; Published according to the pamphlet checked with the verbatim report; Brief report published in Izvestia No. 270, December 10, 1918Source:Lenin’sCollected Works, 4th English Edition, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972 Volume 28, pages 329-337Translated:Jim RiordanTranscription/HTML Markup:David Walters & Robert
      CymbalaOnline Version:Lenin Internet
	ArchiveMay, 2002

(Stormy ovation.) Comrades, the workers’ co-operatives are
      today faced with extremely important economic and political
      tasks. Both the one and the other are now part and parcel of the
      economic and political struggle. In respect of the immediate
      tasks I want to underline the meaning of “conciliation
      with the co-operatives”. This conciliation, mentioned so
      frequently of late in the papers, radically differs from the
      conciliation with the bourgeoisie, which is nothing short of
      treachery. This conciliation we are talking about now is
      conciliation of a very special kind. There is a world of
      difference between the Soviet Government’s conciliation
      with Germany which produced some results, and the
      conciliation-which would be harmful and even fatal to the
      country of the working class with the bourgeoisie. What that
      pretext of conciliation amounts to is the complete betrayal both
      of the class struggle and the fundamentals of
      socialism. Socialists who are well aware that their chief task
      is to fight the bourgeoisie and capital appreciate this
      distinction.

All of us very well realise that there can only be one
    alternative in our class struggle: recognition either of the rule
    of capital or of the working class. We know that all the attempts
    by the petty-bourgeois parties to form and pursue their policy in
    the country are doomed to failure before they even start.. We have
    clearly seen and experienced several attempts by various
    petty-bourgeois parties and groups to push through their policy,
    and we see that all attempts by intermediate forces are bound to
    end in failure. By virtue of the very definite conditions there
    are only two central forces, standing at opposite ends of the
    pole, that can have a hold on Russia, can decide her fate one way
    or the other. I will go even further and say that the whole world
    is being formed and directed by one or the other of these central
    forces. As far as Russia is concerned I can say quite definitely
    that, because of the specific economic conditions, only one of
    these forces can take control. The rest, the intermediate forces,
    may be numerous but they can never count for much.

Right now, the Soviet authorities must face the question of
    conciliation with the co-operatives. In April we departed from our
    vowed intention and made concessions. Naturally enough, there
    should be no class co-operatives in a country where all classes
    are being eliminated, but, I repeat, the conditions of the time
    demanded a certain delay and we put it off for a few months.
    Nevertheless, we all realise that the Soviet government will
    never abandon the position it now occupies. We had to make those
    concessions since at that time we were alone in the whole
    world. Our concessions were due to the difficulties we had in our
    work. Because of the economic tasks which the proletariat had
    taken on, we had to reconcile ourselves to and preserve certain
    petty-bourgeois habits. The point here is that in one way or
    another we must ensure the guidance and co-ordination of the
    activity of the whole mass of working and exploited people. We
    must all the while bear in mind what the proletariat requires of
    us. A popular government must remember that the various sections
    of the petty bourgeoisie will more and more come over to the
    governing working class when they eventually see there is no
    choice, that all their hopes of a middle way of running the
    country are finally ruined. All the wonderful slogans about
    popular will, the Constituent Assembly and the like, which were a
    screen for all the half-measures, were immediately swept away the
    moment genuine popular will asserted itself. You can see for
    yourselves what happened and how all these slogans, the
    half-measure slogans, were scattered to the winds. At the given
    moment, we can see this happening throughout the whole world in
    revolution as well as in Russia.

I want to show you the difference between the conciliation
    which produced such an appalling disgust throughout the working
    class, and the conciliation which we are now calling for,
    agreement with all the small peasants, all the petty
    bourgeoisie. At the time of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty, when
    we accepted the harsh terms of the treaty, it was said there was
    no hope of a world revolution, nor could there be. We were quite
    alone in the world. We know that at that time many parties were
    repelled from us because of the treaty and joined the
    bourgeoisie. At that time we had to endure all sorts of terrible
    experiences. A few months later we saw there was and could be no
    choice, no middle way.

When the German revolution came, everyone realised that
    revolution was sweeping the whole world, that Britain, France and
    America were also going the same way-along our path! When our
    petty-bourgeois democrats followed their patrons, they did not
    realise where they were being led, they did not realise they were
    being led along the capitalist road. Now we see by the example of
    the German revolution that these representatives and patrons of
    democracy, these Wilsons and Co., are imposing worse treaties on a
    defeated nation than the Brest-Litovsk Treaty which was forced on
    us. It is quite clear to us that international demagogy is now
    bankrupt because of the events in the West and the new
    situation. Now the physiognomy of every nation is as clear as can
    be. Now, the masks have been torn off and all the illusions have
    been dispelled by the battering-ram of history.

It is natural that the Soviet government should have to use all
    its influence and weight with such waverers who are always around
    during a transition, so as to carry out tasks which we are now
    setting, tasks which back our policy begun in April. We then had
    to put off our vowed intentions for a while; then we consciously
    and openly made several concessions.

Someone asked about exactly where we stand on this road. Now
    the whole of Europe clearly sees that our revolution is no longer
    in the experimental stage; the attitude of the civilised nations
    to us has now changed. They now appreciate that in this respect we
    are doing something new and tremendous, that we have had so much
    trouble because for almost all the time we stood utterly alone and
    completely forsaken by the entire international proletariat. In
    this respect we have been guilty of many serious mistakes which we
    do not in any way hide. We should, of course, have endeavoured to
    unite the whole population and not to divide them. We may not have
    done it up to now and we must get down to the job sometime. We
    have already joined up with many organisations. Now, the
    workers’ co-operatives and Soviet bodies should be
    merged. Since this April we have been organising on the basis of
    experience and we have been employing the store of social and
    political forces that we have at our disposal. We have been
    organising the supply and distribution of goods among the whole
    population. We have checked every step we took because this
    organisation has been particularly difficult to carry out in our
    economically backward country. Agreements with the co-operatives
    were first made in April and the decree issued on the complete
    merger and organisation of supply and distribution pursues the
    same aim.

The previous speaker mentioned friction in a reference to
    Petrograd; we know there is friction almost everywhere. We also
    know that this friction is quite inevitable because the time has
    come when two utterly different types of apparatus are meeting and
    merging. We know too, however, that we have to pass through it
    because it is inevitable. In just the same way you must realise
    that the long resistance put up by the workers’
    co-operatives has finally resulted in distrust from the Soviet
    government, a distrust that is perfectly natural.

You say you want independence. It is quite natural that anyone
    who puts forward this demand should induce distrust. If you
    complain of friction and want to avoid it, then you must first
    give up the idea of independence since anyone who insists on that
    is an enemy of the Soviet government at a time when we are all
    striving for a closer union. Once the workers’ co-operatives
    unite in a perfectly clearcut, honest and open way with the Soviet
    government, this friction will begin to disappear. I know only too
    well that when two groups merge the work does not proceed smoothly
    at first. Nevertheless, with a little time, when the one group
    earns the trust of the other, all the friction gradually fades
    away. However, constant inter-departmental friction is likely if
    the two groups stay apart. I don’t understand what
    independence has got to do with it. After all we all agree that
    the whole of society should be one big co-operative as far as
    supply and distribution are concerned. All of us agree that the
    co-operatives are a socialist gain. There lies the immense
    difficulty of socialist gains. There lie the difficulty and aim of
    victory. Capitalism deliberately splits the population. This split
    must disappear once and for all, and the whole of society must
    become a single workers’ co-operative. There can and must be
    no question of any kind of independence for individual groups.

To establish this type of co-operative I was speaking about
    just now is the condition for the victory of socialism. That is
    why we say that no matter what difference of opinion we may have
    over private matters, we shall never come to terms with capitalism
    or take any step away from the principles of our struggle. The
    agreement we are now going to make with sections of social classes
    is an agreement not with the bourgeoisie or capital, but with
    individual groups of workers and democrats. There is nothing to be
    afraid of in this agreement because the whole difference between
    these sections will disappear without. a trace in the fire of
    revolution. Now all we need is a single will to enter with an open
    heart that single world co-operative. What the Soviet government
    and the co-operatives have done up to now must be merged. That is
    the substance of the latest decree passed by the Soviet
    government. That has been the approach by Soviet representatives
    in many places in the absence of our decree. The tremendous good
    accomplished by the co-operatives must be merged with the
    tremendous good accomplished by the Soviet government. All
    sections of the population fighting for their freedom must be
    merged in a single strong organisation. We know we have made a lot
    of mistakes, especially in the first months after the October
    Revolution. But from now onwards, after a passage of time, we
    shall endeavour to attain a complete union and complete agreement
    among the population. To do so, everything must come under the
    Soviet government and all illusions about some sort of
    “independence", whether for individual groups or the
    workers’ co-operatives, must be dispelled as quickly as
    possible. Hopes for “independence” can only be held
    out where there can still be hopes for some sort of return to the
    past.

The Western nations once regarded us and all our revolutionary
    movement as a curiosity. They used to say: “Let the people
    have their fling; we shall wait and see how it all works out
    .... Queer people, those Russians!” Now the “queer
    Russians” have shown the world what their
    “fling” means. (Applause.)

Now that the German revolution has broken out, a foreign consul
    said to Zinoviev: “It’s hard to say at this point who
    has made better use of the Brest-Litovsk Peace, you or
    we.”

He said this because everyone was saying it. Everyone saw that
    this was just the beginning of the great world revolution. And
    this great revolution was started by the backward and
    “queer” Russian people .... History certainly has
    strange ways: that a backward country should have the honour of
    leading a great world movement, which is seen and understood by
    the bourgeoisie of the whole world. This conflagration has swept
    Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Holland.

This movement is spreading from day to day, the revolutionary
    Soviet Government is daily gaining in strength. That is why the
    bourgeoisie have now taken an entirely different attitude to
    matters. Now that the axe is about to fall on world capitalism,
    there can be no question at all of any independence for individual
    parties. America provides the most glaring example. America is one
    of the most democratic countries, it is a great democratic social
    republic. Where else, if not in that country-which has all the
    electoral rights and all the rights of a free state-could we
    expect a correct solution to all legal questions? Yet we know what
    has happened to a clergyman there, in that democratic republic: he
    was tarred and whipped until his blood flowed in the dust. This
    took place in a free country, in a democratic republic. This was
    allowed to happen by the “humane",
    “philanthropic” Tiger Wilsons and Co. What are these
    Wilsons now doing with Germany, a defeated country? The pictures
    of world relations are displayed before us in full view! We see
    the substance of what the Wilsons offer their friends from these
    pictures, which carry such overwhelming conviction. The Wilsons
    would have instantly proved our point. These gentlemen-the free
    multimillionaires, the “most humane” people in the
    world-would have instantly broken their friends’ habit of
    talking, even of dreaming, of “independence” in any
    form. They would have squarely put before you the alternative:
    either you stand for the capitalist system or you stand for the
    Soviets. They would have said: do this, because we say so, we,
    your friends, the British, the Amnericans-the Wilsons, and the
    French Clemenceau’s friends.

That is why it is quite hopeless to expect any vestige of
    independence to remain. This cannot be, and it is no use dreaming
    of it. There can be no middle course once it is a question of
    protecting property on the one hand, and once the proletariat has
    found its way on the other. The branches of the tree of life must
    either be closely intertwined with capital, or even more closely
    with the Soviet Republic. It is absolutely clear to everyone that
    socialism has entered the period of its realisation. It is quite
    clear to everyone that it is absolutely impossible to maintain or
    retain petty-bourgeois positions through universal suffrage. The
    Wilsons may nurture such illusions, rather, they do not nurture
    such illusions but try to embellish their own aims by fostering
    such illusions, but you won’t find many people nowadays who
    believe these fairy-tales. If such people do exist, they are a
    historical rarity or a museum piece. (Applause.)

The differences you have had from the outset about preserving
    the “independence” of the co-operative movement are
    nothing but vain efforts which must peter out without any hope of
    a positive solution. This struggle is not serious and it clashes
    with the principles of democracy. Although this is not surprising
    because the Wilsons are also “democrats”. They say
    that it remains for them to establish one final union because they
    have so many dollars they can buy up the whole of Russia, and the
    whole of India, and the whole world. Wilson presides over their
    company, their pockets are bulging with dollars and that is why
    they talk about buying up Russia and India and everything
    else. But they forget that basic international issues are settled
    in an entirely different manner, that only some people, in a
    definite environment, may be impressed by their statements. They
    forget that the resolutions daily adopted by the strongest class
    in the world-the kind our own Congress is sure to adopt
    unanimously-greet only the dictatorship of the proletariat all
    over the world. By adopting such a resolution our Congress takes
    the road which does not and cannot lead to the kind of
    “independence” being discussed here today. You are
    aware that Karl Liebknecht has shown some opposition not only to
    the petty-bourgeois peasants, but also to the cooperative
    movement. You know that just for this Scheidemann and company
    consider him a dreamer and fanatic, yet you addressed a message of
    greetings to him, just as you sent greetings to Maclean. By
    voicing solidarity on these matters with the great world leaders
    you have burnt your boats. You must keep a firm stand because at
    the moment you are standing up not only for yourselves, not only
    for your own rights, but also for the rights of Liebknecht and
    Maclean. I have often heard the Russian Mensheviks condemn
    conciliation, and inveigh against those who came to terms with the
    Kaiser’s lackeys. Nor were the Mensheviks alone in erring
    that way. The whole world pointed at us, hurling this stern
    charge: “Conciliators.” Now that the world revolution
    has started, and they have to deal with Haase and Kautsky, we have
    the right to describe our position in the words of the good
    Russian proverb: “Let’s stand back, and see how well
    we are placed.”

We know our shortcomings, and they are easily pointed out. But
      to the onlooker everything appears to be quite different from
      what it actually is. At one time, you know, everyone in the
      other parties condemned our behaviour and our policy, and now
      whole parties are siding with 

      us.[2]The wheel of the
      world revolutionary movement has now turned to such an extent
      that we need not fear any kind of conciliation whatsoever. And I
      am sure that our Congress will find the right way out of the
      situation. There is only one way out: a merger of the
      co-operative movement with the Soviet government. You know that
      Britain, France, America and Spain regarded our actions as
      experiments; they have now changed their tune: they now have to
      look to their own affairs at home. Of course, physically,
      materially and financially they are considerably stronger than
      we are, but in spite of their outward polish we know they are
      rotten inside; they are stronger than we are at present with the
      strength that was Germany’s when the Brest-Litovsk Peace
      Treaty was concluded. But what do we see now? Everyone recoiled
      from us then. Now, every month we spend in strengthening the
      Soviet Republic we spend in defending not only ourselves, but
      also the cause started by Liebknecht and Maclean, and we already
      see that Britain, France, America and Spain have been infected
      with the same disease and are fired with the same flame as
      Germany, the flame of the universal and world-wide struggle of
      the working class against imperialism. (Prolonged applause.)

[1]The Congress was held in Moscow on December 6-11, 1918. It was
    attended by 208 voting delegates and 98 non-voting delegates. 121
    of the voting delegates were Communists and their sympathisers and
    the other 87 delegates were supporters of
    “independent” co-operatives, i.e., Mensheviks and
    Bight Socialist-Revolutionaries who advocated the independence of
    the co-operatives from the Soviet state. Lenin spoke about the
    tasks of workers’ co-operatives at the evening session on
    December 9. Among other speakers were V. P. Nogie and
    V. P. Milyutin. The Congress censured the anti-Soviet demands for
    “independence” for the co-operatives and decided to
    get the worker!’ co-operatives to organise food supplies
    jointly with state food organs. The Congress elected the
    All-Russia Council of Workers’ Co-operatives of 15 members,
    10 of whom were Communists (V. P. Nogin, V. P. Milyutin,
    I. I. Skvortsov-Stepanov and others.

[2]This refers to the Narodnik Communists and Revolutionary
    Communists who had split away from the Left
    Socialist-Revolutionary Party (see Note 128).